Why 60 fps is a must for the PS4 – A Comparison Between 30 fps and 60 fps

60 fps should be the norm for the PS4.

Here’s a test that will tell you exactly what are the differences between 30 fps and 60 fps with the help of GIFs. One animation is running at 30 fps and the other at 60 fps.

These GIFs are from Dark Souls. The game has one of the best and sophisticated animation system that is not only fluent but also gives a  weighty feeling. However, the game was originally made with 30 fps in mind but some modders manged to unlock a higher framerate and adjust the animation system to take advantage of the higher framerate.

One thing to note is that I am usually a person who can’t find a lot of difference between 30 and 60 fps easily, but this test made me see the error of my ways.

Most developers will most likely go with 30 fps because there isn’t a lot of difference to the naked eye and prefer to do more visual trickery. But this comparison clearly shows that 60 fps can really make a lot of difference. Sluggish animations will be a thing of the past.

Killzone: Shadow Fall is supposed to run at 30 fps, but it’s about time 60 fps is standardized across the board. A higher performance is absolutely vital for a lot of genres and that includes fps. There are of course variable frame rates too and games like God of War 3 and God of War: Ascension utilise that, but standardizing a specific framerate will allow devs to build games with that in mind, and we will never ever see a game with shoddy performance next gen at least on the PS4. Now it is up to you to decide whether you prefer a smooth frame rate or that extra visual oomph. Check out the GIF’s below (Via Tumblr)

Note: Please open the GIFs in a new window/tab to see the difference.

a) GIF 1

Left is higher frame rate 

 

b) GIF 2

Left is higher frame rate

 

c) GIF 3

Right is higher frame rate

So there you go. Now you know there are slight differences, mostly minor but noticeable between both types of fps and higher fps is always better in most cases. Which one do you prefer?

Most of the developers will be aiming for 30 fps and 1080P for the PS4 but there is a noticeable difference between the two. We expect that developers will making 60 fps as standard, atleast for certain genres like racing and sports games. Whether this will turn out true for complex genres like role playing or open world games, remains to be seen.

Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

Tagged with: , , ,

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cory-Shultz/512971803 Cory Shultz

    You do realize due to hardware enhancements built into most web browsers, the gifs are not going to appear correctly unless you click into them. The browser is going to attempt to play the gifs at 30 frames.

    • brianc6234

      What do you mean by click into them? I clicked on all three and got just the GIF’s in my browser and they look the same.

  • Godmars

    Only noticing a slight – not really worth mentioning – difference.

    I mean if 60fps is there its there. Otherwise – so what?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cory-Shultz/512971803 Cory Shultz

      click the gif and view it in its own page. Helps

    • dakan45

      See that is the problem, you think the diffirence is small. When most console gamers compare the pc version with console version the think the diffirence is small and dismiss it, while it isnt, their eyes are not used to it and since the market can do fine in those settings, they do and dont bother improving.

    • benbenkr

      Okay, let’s do a test for yourself. If you can, play DmC on a console and then play it on a PC fast enough to handle it in 60fps locked.

      If you tell me you can’t feel, see or tell the difference, I’ll eat a controller of your choice. I’ll even film it and post it on Youtube. Be honest and be truthful.

      On the other hand if you CAN actually feel, see or tell a difference, I want you to write down on a piece of paper:

      “Only noticing a slight – not really worth mentioning – difference.
      I mean if 60fps is there its there. Otherwise – so what?”

      And eat it after.

    • filipakos kurosanji

      he is talking about those gifs not generally.Those gifs are a bad comparison cause they do have a slight difference as he sais.I agree with you that you need to play the game to understand the difference.Also dark souls on pc was locked at 30 fps and maybe thats why you cant see much difference

    • Code

      Considering the fact that our eyes can only process 24 – 32 fps, i believe you owe us a controller eating video. Any difference you might feel between those two is because of some other reason. You will not be able to tell the difference between a true 30fps and a true 60 fps.

    • benbenkr

      …..in theory.

      I can clearly tell the difference between 24, 32 and 60fps. You can’t because you’re not admitting it.

    • Loki

      oh god, please tell me you’re not serious.

    • Smurfman256

      BULL FUCKING HORSESHIT! That myth was perpetuated on a Russian forum to justify why a player was playing Quake III at 20FPS while the rest of the people were playing at 60+.

    • Jacky

      The PS4′s GPU isn’t powerful enough for 1080p60 is most current games, never will be. You will either have to reduce the resolution, or reduce the graphics to achieve it, making the PS4 already a joke. But it’s Sony, so we all know they will underdeliver once again.

    • Ibi Salmon

      From these gifs, I suppose it doesn’t mean much.

      But when you’re playing a game, it’s an entirely different story. It’s a small thing that can add a lot in the big run.

  • MyBodyIsReady

    All you did was show me there is barely any difference :|

    I enjoyed the gifs though (Y)

  • sponky

    Hope to find an article like this for years!!! Thanks a lot!!!

  • brianc6234

    I don’t see a difference at all in any of the GIFs.

  • http://www.hesido.com/ hesido

    This is really a bad test. You should include videos that allow hardware
    acceleration, that contain camera pans and big movements. This is not
    doing the 60fps argument any favours. Hardware accelerated video has a
    better chance of being actually displayed at 60fps.

  • dakan45

    Dark souls clunky animations is fine example.

    Anyway you wont get 60 fps on a console that is already weaker than most pcs, so much for “next gen i guess”

    Dont make any crappy arguments, ps4 is pc architecture and it is essentially a inferior pc, so what will happen is make games on pc and downgrade them to be ported on ps4.

    Finally the “console optimization” is a myth. Most games nowdays run on low settings on consoles. So there is no such as thing as optimization on consoles, just weaker harwdare giving weaker results and console gamers thinking tahts all those games are when in reallity they are far better on pc.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kevin-Andrews/1730922664 Kevin Andrews

      inferior to pc thats something to say when pc has yet to show something that turns me away for killzone 2 and 3 let alone deep down

    • dakan45

      killzone is a cover based first person shooter, a fucking disgrace. The original crysis had more gameplay in it than this joke. Then the series got dumbed down for consoles. Or you reffer to graphics? becasue crysis 3 is already far better looking than both. Witcher 2 as well.

      Sony is spendinb billions every year for those exlusives to be made, pc has no owner, thus no one pays for games, it is a free platform.

    • geeb

      Yeah… honestly dude. The only games worth mentioning for pc graphics are Crysis and Metro and neither of those games are entertaining in terms of what they try to accomplish. My pc is mid-ranged as of 3 years ago and my 6 year old ps3 blows it out of the water in graphical terms with the last two uncharteds, the last two killzones, and the last two god of wars. Hell, heavy rain and mgs4 were beautiful too. Don’t mean to cite generic references, but maybe if other systems’ fanboys actually sat down and played those games on an hd tv (perhaps with 3D) they would see how amazing a “low-end pc” can be.

      I hope you enjoy your upgrade bills, slightly superior multiplatforms, and countless exclusives (strategy and MMO’s really?).

    • dakan45

      Actually you are wrong. Bf3 and max payne 3 on consoles are running on low end pc settings.

      Crysis 3 on the lowest settings is far better than the console version, far cry 3 is low med settigns.

      So no your ps3 DOES NOT blow away the pc vesion.

      Uncharted 2? that game looked as good as mw2 on pc and killzone 2? That game had way too much blur to fake graphics. Admitedly 2 and 3 increased texture quality but no, pc games look better. God of war 3 was a ugly game in 1080p, nothing that dmc and darksiders 2 are not on pc.

      “I hope you enjoy your upgrade bills”

      Same pc 5 years now and wasnt top of the line back then either. Apparently you cant afford to spend 200 on a new videocard every 4 years. Let me remind you that it is COMPLETLY OPTIONAL since the console optimization is a myth and you might as well play the game on HIGHER than the console settings, just not on high or maxed out.

      But hey, what you want them to do? Not improve graphics becasue your consoles are fucking ancient? That is a fucking disgreace and shows more elitism than pc gamers since you DEMAND that games accomedate for your 8 year old hardware. WHY THE HELL did this generation lasted so long? Development costs thats why.

      The console optimization is a myth, you play games on low settings, the pc demands is also a myth since you can still play games with old hardware, but to DEMAND that games run on a 6 year old pc? REALLY? Which they do, but REALLY?

      Also pc has more exclusives than any other system becasue it is a FREE system, no one has to pay ms or sony to make them nor to approve em. For that reason they are cheaper. But hey, if you prefer another casuallized AAA hollywood shooter with tons of dlcs instead of a quality game, go ahead keep playing on consoles

      lol “mgs4 was beatyfull” Nope, crysis far cry 2 , far better looking games. heavy rain was scripted as hell thats why it was pretty.

      Pc is as expensive as you want it to be.

      “but maybe if other systems’ fanboys actually sat down and played those
      games on an hd tv (perhaps with 3D) they would see how amazing a
      “low-end pc” can be.”

      First of all, pc has superior sound and 3d image capabilities with 3d vision and oculus which is like VR, yes me playing on a generic mobo sound card has better audio than your overpriced honme cinema. Also you dont need “hdtv” pc games are hd by themselfs. For the record 720p is not “hd” You propably browsing this site on a resolution higher than 1280x720p

      If this is your idea of gaming, then year perhaps you should try “low end pc” and see what it is like.

  • DarthDiggler

    Are you using Dark Souls assets? Any chance you can do this test with a Native 60FPS game on PC and compare it to a Native 30FPS game on Console?

  • geeb

    Yeah not seeing a huge difference. Maybe just 60 fps for racing games or over-the-top action games is really necessary. If people want a standardized increase maybe just go for 45 fps approx. because then the difference between that and 60 would be negligible and the graphics would not be as compromised.

    • http://twitter.com/SykeMed SykeMed

      No, it has little to do with the FPS but the refresh rate of your display. Majority of Monitors/tv/screens work at 60Hz, that is, they refresh 60 times per second. Hence if you can generate 60 FPS in game you’re all set… nice and fluid image as each frame is displayed with new image. Anything above is ‘technically’ a waste and the moment you drop down to below that, even to 59 FPS, will result in very noticeable skipped frames… sometimes 2-3 refreshes before new image is shown. We’re talking mili seconds but the eye can definitely see that.

      Similar happens with 120Hz monitors. 120 FPS or GTFO.

      That is why you either go for 60 or if you can’t 30. At least this way you have a consistent 2-frame delay between each image.

      Still… these number are safety margins… human eye can only capture up to 24 frames per second (neurological limitations) and from those about 15-16 are used by the brain :)

      BTW I love 60 fps and will never trade in my PC since it seems to be the only thing that can give me that.

    • izayoi

      Hahaha! *Facepalm*

  • http://www.facebook.com/ana.helusic Ana Helušić

    lame

    • Jacky

      Like you, you dumb slut!

  • Christian

    The difference is HUGE when your eye is watching these animations actively (that is, while playing – your expect movement as soon as you move the joystick).

  • Heavenly_King

    Open in a new tab, and use your hand to cover one pic, and then the other. You will notice the 60fps feels more fluid.

  • gedden

    Seriously not seeing the difference but when ALL is at 60 thats when you can see a real difference, BTW Retro Studios is working on a engine that can produce visuals like Gears of War and kill zone but running AT 60 FPS for the Wii U! Please take note

  • Anukul

    lol I see no difference! more important is to have consistent time between two frames

  • Sarmad Khalid

    I can tell whether a game is running at 30fps or 60fps by staring at the screen for less than a second. If you say there is no noticeable difference then you should probably see a doctor.

  • Syanara

    These pictures really arent the best for comaprision, What you need is to show a full video trailer for a game in 60fps and then in 30fps

  • Gregor Ebert

    IMO 60Hz really improves any game though, too. I think the best example for that was a demo of Uncharted 3 in 60FPS and 30FPS in comparison; you can find that here:

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-what-if-uncharted-3-ran-at-60-fps

    Greetz from Germany,
    Gregor

  • SyKrysus

    You do understand it is up to the developer to manage the resources of their game, and it is up to the to utilize them correctly to have a high preformace game. PS4 does not cap games frame rates. Its the developer.

  • phil

    i really cant tell the difference, i never have been able to and i have been gaming over 20 years.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Trond-Inge-Thingstad/549440308 Trond-Inge Thingstad

    I see no difference… I’ve never understood the hype about “omfg max fps is epix!!” The eye is not capable of recording more than 24 fps. The only reason I can ever understand why someone wants max fps is during performance-spikes and sudden fps-drops

39 queries. 0.259 seconds